MikeCZAR:
how about introducing maps.

Introducing Maps ?

as a response to check chadain political and media D*** wagging. we should take up Egypt's request for assistance with isis and send a Tri Force-task force of 1000 fighting men (support units , docters, logistics, armoured corps not included) the fighting men will be ranger level trained and have there own compliment of armour ( 40 Btr4s 20-30 t90/t72 100 btr apcs 30 ch-3 drones 100 logistics vehicles 5 an-12s for para drops) with a initial federal budget of 300 million$ the soldiers should get there own camouflage specific only to them. this force should be trained for a year prior and should not be taken from active soldiers in the northeast. this force should be used as a skirmishing force and air cover should be provided by Egypt. set up a base in libya near the Egyptain border.

additional forces should be put on a 6 month training schedule 500 fighting men per training cycle trained in desert, asymmetric, coin, and base defense.

Support units- an artillery regiment , regular infantry for base defense, logistics

this force will give us more political leverage over north africa gain respect from the Egyptians and other arab countries aswell as African countries and most of all it will protect nigeria from a growing isis threat abroad and possibly at home.

a millitary alliance with Egypt and algeria will be the best way to grow influence in arabias

here i have made a rough proposal for a Nigerian expeditionary force to counter Isis, please i would like to see the proposal to others and feel free to correct or build upon what i have already stated

I'd rather we concentrate first on the boko-haram problem, before we start contemplating going on any ISIL expedition. That is taking care of operations, equipment, media and logistics.

Henry120:
I'd rather we concentrate first on the boko-haram problem, before we start contemplating going on any ISIL expedition. That is taking care of operations, equipment, media and logistics.

i agree, but at the same time if we dont have forward thinking on the international threats faceing our country. then we are doomed to face the same humilation we have faced and are still facing. saying we should wait until boko harem is delt with is short sighted and deadly, you of all people should understand where i am coming from. if isis is made to distableize libya even futher then that can only spell disaster for the rest of africa. imagine if isis take control of the oil rigs then that will lead to more attacks in african contires.

look at it this way libya is nigeria isis is boko haram and wthout forward thinking we are playing the role of camaroon

Nigeria27:


i agree, but at the same time if we dont have forward thinking on the international threats faceing our country. then we are doomed to face the same humilation we have faced and are still facing. saying we should wait until boko harem is delt with is short sighted and deadly, you of all people should understand where i am coming from. if isis is made to distableize libya even futher then that can only spell disaster for the rest of africa. imagine if isis take control of the oil rigs then that will lead to more attacks in african contires.

look at it this way libya is nigeria isis is boko haram and wthout forward thinking we are playing the role of camaroon

I should have made my opinion clearer. I agree with all you said in your Prime post, however, although i understand ISIS in libya is also a Nigerian problem, we currently have our hands full with operations to rout out boko-haram.

Where are the assets to assist us in such a mission, or are solely going to depend on the egyptians?

Nigeria27:
as a response to check chadain political and media D*** wagging. we should take up Egypt's request for assistance with isis and send a Tri Force-task force of 1000 fighting men (support units , docters, logistics, armoured corps not included) the fighting men will be ranger level trained and have there own compliment of armour ( 40 Btr4s 20-30 t90/t72 100 btr apcs 30 ch-3 drones 100 logistics vehicles 5 an-12s for para drops) with a initial federal budget of 300 million$ the soldiers should get there own camouflage specific only to them. this force should be trained for a year prior and should not be taken from active soldiers in the northeast. this force should be used as a skirmishing force and air cover should be provided by Egypt. set up a base in libya near the Egyptain border.

additional forces should be put on a 6 month training schedule 500 fighting men per training cycle trained in desert, asymmetric, coin, and base defense.

Support units- an artillery regiment , regular infantry for base defense, logistics

this force will give us more political leverage over north africa gain respect from the Egyptians and other arab countries aswell as African countries and most of all it will protect nigeria from a growing isis threat abroad and possibly at home.

a millitary alliance with Egypt and algeria will be the best way to grow influence in arabias

Nigeria can't do that right now.

The troops in Sudan weren't pulled out for no reason.

Henry120:


I should have made my opinion clearer. I agree with all you said in your Prime post, however, although i understand ISIS in libya is also a Nigerian problem, we currently have our hands full with operations to rout out boko-haram.

Where are the assets to assist us in such a mission, or are solely going to depend on the egyptians?

the mis-communication is my fault as well, this force should start thier training cycle after boko haram starts to become an internal security problem although i do realize that boko harem will always in a way be an armies problem. this force can come after all tatories are captured and boko harem starts attacking soft targets.

like i stated the task force will be purely infantry(with expection of the an-12 for para drops) it is a means of supporting the eygptains rather then leading the offensive, air cover should be provided by the Egyptian. because as we all know air cover is expensive and no politicain will look at any proposal that is to expensive

but my main point is if we wait until boko harem is finished then it will already be to late becuase like history tells us terriost and insurgancys never truly die they just evolve and(or) migrate

www.benning.army.mil/infantry/magazine/issues/2013/May-June/Welch.html

I find this very interesting... The Sri Lanka army/LRRP/SIOTS and the eetam war I-III... Do Read

Am really piss off with d way chadian n Niger army Generals are making statements against NA just to boost their ego

Henry120 we need to be proactive abt Isis
Infact we help creating it in libya
And we already seeing libyan arms been use by d enemy

Henry120 we need to be proactive abt Isis
Infact we help creating it in libya

the lord is there strength

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZkV4d3Q_98

Re this test:
An interesting explanation of the dynamics, from Darren Olivier over at Africandefence.net:

So the Al-Tariq is the new name of the Umbani, originally developed by Denel Dynamics but now marketed, sold and soon to be built by a joint venture between Denel and Tawazun called Tawazun Dynamics. It's a modular bomb kit, adding control surfaces, guidance computers, sensors and boosters to standard 'dumb' Mk81, Mk82 and Mk83 bombs.

The kit starts from basic control surfaces designed to guide the bomb in free-fall to a range of 40km from 30 000ft or higher, through to pop-out wings that increase the range significantly and rocket boosters that can push the range out to 200km or so.

An interesting feature of the Al-Tariq is that it's carried upside down, so the very first manoeuvre it makes is to roll 180º once released and clear of the aircraft. This is why the Hawk pilot in this video inverted his own aircraft to spot the bomb while it rolled and to re-orient himself on its starboard side.

The variant demonstrated at the Defence Day was the one without the pop-out wings, the Hawk Mk120 flew past us to show the bomb on one of its underwing pylons then staged out over the ocean to release it. Once dropped, we saw live video from the onboard camera showing the bomb making two turns before impacting within a metre of the target. Later on, a Seeker II overflew the target area uploading its video feed to the big screens in front of the audience.

The video we have here is from a different test and shows the glide-bomb variant with pop-out wings, capable of flying much further. Because it glides at a speed the Hawk Mk120 launch aircraft can match, the crew followed it all the way until it jettisoned the wings and dove onto the target from above. In both cases the bomb carried no warhead, as the intention was test the guidance systems and it was important to have the target be as intact as possible to accurately measure impact point.

In terms of sensors, the basic option is a jam-resistant GPS/INS guidance kit, but additional options include imaging infrared sensors with automated target recognition and a semi-active laser seeker, which bring the CEP down to under 3m.

The UAE has bought a few hundred Al-Tariqs for its Mirage 2000-9s and Hawk Mk102s, which are being built by Denel Dynamics at the moment but which will eventually be produced by the Tawazun Dynamics facility in the UAE. Denel Dynamics will then revert its local team to continuing R& work on the Al-Tariq and other systems.

The SAAF has not acquired any despite the weapon being integrated onto their Hawk Mk120, but they have said that funds permitting they'd like to acquire it sometime after 2018 and integrate it onto the Gripen in place of the small batch of Paveway kits currently in service.

On the Angolan SU-30K:

http://www.africandefence.net/angolas-su-30ks-are-not-a-serious-threat-to-the-south-african-air-force/

frumentius:
On the Angolan SU-30K:

http://www.africandefence.net/angolas-su-30ks-are-not-a-serious-threat-to-the-south-african-air-force/

An in-depth analytical examination:
http://www.africandefence.net/the-impact-of-angolas-new-su-30ks/

frumentius:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZkV4d3Q_98

Re this test:
An interesting explanation of the dynamics, from Darren Olivier over at Africandefence.net:

So the Al-Tariq is the new name of the Umbani, originally developed by Denel Dynamics but now marketed, sold and soon to be built by a joint venture between Denel and Tawazun called Tawazun Dynamics. It's a modular bomb kit, adding control surfaces, guidance computers, sensors and boosters to standard 'dumb' Mk81, Mk82 and Mk83 bombs.

The kit starts from basic control surfaces designed to guide the bomb in free-fall to a range of 40km from 30 000ft or higher, through to pop-out wings that increase the range significantly and rocket boosters that can push the range out to 200km or so.

An interesting feature of the Al-Tariq is that it's carried upside down, so the very first manoeuvre it makes is to roll 180º once released and clear of the aircraft. This is why the Hawk pilot in this video inverted his own aircraft to spot the bomb while it rolled and to re-orient himself on its starboard side.

The variant demonstrated at the Defence Day was the one without the pop-out wings, the Hawk Mk120 flew past us to show the bomb on one of its underwing pylons then staged out over the ocean to release it. Once dropped, we saw live video from the onboard camera showing the bomb making two turns before impacting within a metre of the target. Later on, a Seeker II overflew the target area uploading its video feed to the big screens in front of the audience.

The video we have here is from a different test and shows the glide-bomb variant with pop-out wings, capable of flying much further. Because it glides at a speed the Hawk Mk120 launch aircraft can match, the crew followed it all the way until it jettisoned the wings and dove onto the target from above. In both cases the bomb carried no warhead, as the intention was test the guidance systems and it was important to have the target be as intact as possible to accurately measure impact point.

In terms of sensors, the basic option is a jam-resistant GPS/INS guidance kit, but additional options include imaging infrared sensors with automated target recognition and a semi-active laser seeker, which bring the CEP down to under 3m.

The UAE has bought a few hundred Al-Tariqs for its Mirage 2000-9s and Hawk Mk102s, which are being built by Denel Dynamics at the moment but which will eventually be produced by the Tawazun Dynamics facility in the UAE. Denel Dynamics will then revert its local team to continuing R& work on the Al-Tariq and other systems.

The SAAF has not acquired any despite the weapon being integrated onto their Hawk Mk120, but they have said that funds permitting they'd like to acquire it sometime after 2018 and integrate it onto the Gripen in place of the small batch of Paveway kits currently in service.

Very very neat piece of equipment to have!! Surely SAAF can acquire the Al-Tariq before 2018 thanks to the Defence review, I can confidently assume that all of us are also in agreement that SAAF is in need of BVR platforms and should acquire them sooner than later. A Gripen armed with the Al Tariq, Marlin/Meteor and A Darter will be an intimidating prospect for in enemy force in the world!

frumentius:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZkV4d3Q_98

Re this test:
An interesting explanation of the dynamics, from Darren Olivier over at Africandefence.net:

So the Al-Tariq is the new name of the Umbani, originally developed by Denel Dynamics but now marketed, sold and soon to be built by a joint venture between Denel and Tawazun called Tawazun Dynamics. It's a modular bomb kit, adding control surfaces, guidance computers, sensors and boosters to standard 'dumb' Mk81, Mk82 and Mk83 bombs.

The kit starts from basic control surfaces designed to guide the bomb in free-fall to a range of 40km from 30 000ft or higher, through to pop-out wings that increase the range significantly and rocket boosters that can push the range out to 200km or so.

An interesting feature of the Al-Tariq is that it's carried upside down, so the very first manoeuvre it makes is to roll 180º once released and clear of the aircraft. This is why the Hawk pilot in this video inverted his own aircraft to spot the bomb while it rolled and to re-orient himself on its starboard side.

The variant demonstrated at the Defence Day was the one without the pop-out wings, the Hawk Mk120 flew past us to show the bomb on one of its underwing pylons then staged out over the ocean to release it. Once dropped, we saw live video from the onboard camera showing the bomb making two turns before impacting within a metre of the target. Later on, a Seeker II overflew the target area uploading its video feed to the big screens in front of the audience.

The video we have here is from a different test and shows the glide-bomb variant with pop-out wings, capable of flying much further. Because it glides at a speed the Hawk Mk120 launch aircraft can match, the crew followed it all the way until it jettisoned the wings and dove onto the target from above. In both cases the bomb carried no warhead, as the intention was test the guidance systems and it was important to have the target be as intact as possible to accurately measure impact point.

In terms of sensors, the basic option is a jam-resistant GPS/INS guidance kit, but additional options include imaging infrared sensors with automated target recognition and a semi-active laser seeker, which bring the CEP down to under 3m.

The UAE has bought a few hundred Al-Tariqs for its Mirage 2000-9s and Hawk Mk102s, which are being built by Denel Dynamics at the moment but which will eventually be produced by the Tawazun Dynamics facility in the UAE. Denel Dynamics will then revert its local team to continuing R& work on the Al-Tariq and other systems.

The SAAF has not acquired any despite the weapon being integrated onto their Hawk Mk120, but they have said that funds permitting they'd like to acquire it sometime after 2018 and integrate it onto the Gripen in place of the small batch of Paveway kits currently in service.

Just like the chaps who fought in the 87-88 campaigns in Angola, if the. Al Tariq is bought by SAAF SA infantry men will keep wondering why their air force(jets) isn't flying close air support.

Rocket boosters mean it can also be launched at low altitude, while avoiding radar detection.

I suspect the development of these stand-off weapons is the foundation for a future cruise missile project.

jln115:

Very very neat piece of equipment to have!! Surely SAAF can acquire the Al-Tariq before 2018 thanks to the Defence review, I can confidently assume that all of us are also in agreement that SAAF is in need of BVR platforms and should acquire them sooner than later. A Gripen armed with the Al Tariq, Marlin/Meteor and A Darter will be an intimidating prospect for in enemy force in the world!

There's really no urgent need for BVRAAM.

Funding might go to transporters and if true re-establishment of 10 squadron.

I hate the Marlin.

MikeCZAR:
There's really no urgent need for BVRAAM.

Funding might go to transporters and if true re-establishment of 10 squadron.

I hate the Marlin.

Jap I agree in regard with the Transports but whats wrong with the Marlin?

MikeCZAR:
There's really no urgent need for BVRAAM.

Funding might go to transporters and if true re-establishment of 10 squadron.

I hate the Marlin.

For the moment, yes no urgent need. With A-Darter coming into service next year, on-going updates to Gripen radar and software, and the on-going GBADS acquisitions, today's air deterrence capability might be challenged in about 7-10 years, taking into consideration the region's developments. Even the guys up at AFB Makhado rate air-to-air refuelling higher on their list of needs.

10 Squadron is being stood up as we speak. Whilst up in the DRC, I mentioned something about a Denel visit? Yes it was Dynamics and it's not UN but RSABATT. OPSEC demands I stop there.

Mike, what's your problem with Marlin? I do believe there were shortcomings with the original concept (too technically challenged for the details) but much like A-Darter, the current project will surprise. Or so I'm told.

frumentius:


For the moment, yes no urgent need. With A-Darter coming into service next year, on-going updates to Gripen radar and software, and the on-going GBADS acquisitions, today's air deterrence capability might be challenged in about 7-10 years, taking into consideration the region's developments. Even the guys up at AFB Makhado rate air-to-air refuelling higher on their list of needs.

10 Squadron is being stood up as we speak. Whilst up in the DRC, I mentioned something about a Denel visit? Yes it was Dynamics and it's not UN but RSABATT. OPSEC demands I stop there.

Mike, what's your problem with Marlin? I do believe there were shortcomings with the original concept (too technically challenged for the details) but much like A-Darter, the current project will surprise. Or so I'm told.

It would be great if the Reutech dual band radar isn't chosen for the army GBADS and replaced with the Giraffe AMB. There should also be project klooster II for a weapon locating radar.

Yes, you did. There has been talk lately about enhancing capabilities/fire power of forces SA deploy.


And there's one unit which has UAVs.

At its current form it seems like a cost effective weapon system. Less development, incorporating tech from Umkhonto and A-Darter. To me it seems like SA is just trying to pull Brazil onboard then with more funding we might see ambitions risen.

The Meteor has proved a ram-jet has many advantages over a rocket motor on an air to air missile. Denel Dynamics back then as Kentron developed and tested similar ram-jet devices, I don't know if it is funding but the rocket motor should be ditched.

Patchesagain:


Advantages:

1. Superior mobility
2. Reduced battlefield signature (sight and sound)
3. Air deployable

Again, you are failing to see the different needs between SOF/SF (speed, mobility, stealth, firepower) over regular infantry (protection)

Superior mobility = wrong! Both the Panhard SPV and Plasan Sandcat have very good mobility.

The Plasan Sandcat in addition to been better protected has a very reduced battle signature.

Air deployable, everything including LAV-25's are air deployable. So in addition to the Sandcat's air deployability, 79 units of the Plasan only costs 14 million dollars.

14 million dollars would get you only 16 Panhard SPVs.

frumentius:


Now you're just deflecting. You know fully well the Supacat and its cost were not the subject. I suspect you're doing this deliberately because of a paucity of argument to support the following statements when it comes to SF doctrine on RDR vehicles:



Pic 1: French SF - wrong!;
Pic 2: Ghana SF - wrong!;
Pic 3: Namibia SF - wrong!;
Pic 4: Irish SF - wrong!

You keep mentioning these countries, however with these priced SPV's, there is a problem if Special forces on these platforms need to call in Tiger gunships to neutralize 2 targets.

Henry120:


You keep mentioning these countries, however with these priced SPV's, there is a problem if Special forces on these platforms need to call in Tiger gunships to neutralize 2 targets.

. What problem?

MikeCZAR:
Cars keep crushing, so I'll just buy my car from any dealer. Is this what you're saying?

Support: Can the company support the weapon system for next 20 years+.

How do you build a local defence industry?

MikeCZAR:
I said the men need situational awareness. SF aren't infantry.

And where do you get that price? Do you know what's included in it?

Again I ask, is there any evidence that the Plasan Sandcat, Oskosh M-ATV do not provide enough situational awareness?


"Why don't you try using google?". The prices for those vehicles are clear. What do you think are included in the?

Henry120:


Superior mobility = wrong! Both the Panhard SPV and Plasan Sandcat have very good mobility.

The Plasan Sandcat in addition to been better protected has a very reduced battle signature.

Air deployable, everything including LAV-25's are air deployable. So in addition to the Sandcat's air deployability, 79 units of the Plasan only costs 14 million dollars.

14 million dollars would get you only 16 Panhard SPVs.

1. They dont have the mobility of the much lighter Jackal, or "technical"

Jackal
-- Weight: 6t
-- BhP: 185
--- Bhp/Weight = 32


Snadcat
-- Weight: 11t
-- BhP: 325
--- Bhp/weight = 28

The Jackal is a more powerful vehicle and thus, is more mobile (Top Gear Rules apply)

2. An 11 tonne vehical, which is higher and wider than the Jackal with a bigger engine (thus louder) DEFINITLY has a significantly bigger signature than the Jackal.

3. Protection:

SandCat: STANAG 4569 Level 4

Jackal: STANAG 5469 Level 2A

So, the IED protection difference between the two is only 4kg of explosives.

4. Air-deployable:

Sandcat approaches the maximum payload of the Chinhook, and exceeds the payload of all other military helo's (except the crazy ones).

Whilst in comparison, a Chinhook can carry 2 Jackal.

What you dont understand about airdeployability, is we are not talking about tactical airlift here, not strategic.

5. Situtational awareness, the crew of an enclosed vehical will never have the visibility and awareness of a crew in an open vehical

6. Weapons mount.

Jackal: Mounts for up to 2 gpmgs and 1 HMG/GPMG
Sandcat: One mount

Look Henry, special forces have been using high mobility light vehicals and ATV's since the very INVENTION of special forces - infact, if it wasnt for the existance of the light vehical or ATV THERE WOULD BE NO SUCH THING AS SPECIAL FORCES

These generals and officers know what they are doing.

Henry120:


You keep mentioning these countries, however with these priced SPV's, there is a problem if Special forces on these platforms need to call in Tiger gunships to neutralize 2 targets.

That is a doctrinal issue

That is also why they can get away with being lightly armored

Their purpose is high mobility recon

Henry120:




Again I ask, is there any evidence that the Plasan Sandcat, Oskosh M-ATV do not provide enough situational awareness?

Because the Jackal was developed specifically because the British found that recon soldiers inside of MRAP's lack situational awareness

Henry120:

How do you build a local defence industry?



Again I ask, is there any evidence that the Plasan Sandcat, Oskosh M-ATV do not provide enough situational awareness?


"Why don't you try using google?". The prices for those vehicles are clear. What do you think are included in the?

I'm talking about the mounted personnel. Those vehicles offer them less situitional awareness.

Yes, google researchers.

Patchesagain:


1. They dont have the mobility of the much lighter Jackal, or "technical"

Jackal
-- Weight: 6t
-- BhP: 185
--- Bhp/Weight = 32


Snadcat
-- Weight: 11t
-- BhP: 325
--- Bhp/weight = 28

The Jackal is a more powerful vehicle and thus, is more mobile (Top Gear Rules apply)

2. An 11 tonne vehical, which is higher and wider than the Jackal with a bigger engine (thus louder) DEFINITLY has a significantly bigger signature than the Jackal.

3. Protection:

SandCat: STANAG 4569 Level 4

Jackal: STANAG 5469 Level 2A

So, the IED protection difference between the two is only 4kg of explosives.

4. Air-deployable:

Sandcat approaches the maximum payload of the Chinhook, and exceeds the payload of all other military helo's (except the crazy ones).

Whilst in comparison, a Chinhook can carry 2 Jackal.

What you dont understand about airdeployability, is we are not talking about tactical airlift here, not strategic.

5. Situtational awareness, the crew of an enclosed vehical will never have the visibility and awareness of a crew in an open vehical

6. Weapons mount.

Jackal: Mounts for up to 2 gpmgs and 1 HMG/GPMG
Sandcat: One mount

Look Henry, special forces have been using high mobility light vehicals and ATV's since the very INVENTION of special forces - infact, if it wasnt for the existance of the light vehical or ATV THERE WOULD BE NO SUCH THING AS SPECIAL FORCES

These generals and officers know what they are doing.

Weight of the Plasan Sandcat is 8,800kg
Top speed : 120km/H
Can carry weight : 2,300KG
Engine generates : 325hp

It is also easily air transportable by a Ch-53, CH-47 or C-130

The vehicle also provides all round better protection for it's crew. It is also very affordable as $17 million can provide a SOF command with 27 vehicles, while same amount can only get 9 Supacat Jackals.

On situational awareness, the crew doesn't need to actually step out of their vehicle as on board systems provide all round 360 degrees view for Kilometers away.

These so called SPVs really do not provide any real advantage for the costs they offer. It is much much better to have my crew in a Plasan Sandcat or an Oshkosh M-ATV than a Panhard SPV or Jackal.

Marines Special forces agree with me. Their personnel drive in M-ATVs.